5 Minutes with... Nathan Crawford
When Lucky Generals appointed Nathan Crawford as its executive design director this past August, it was a clear statement of intent. Crawford, a veteran who spent over a decade at Saatchi & Saatchi, brings a rare hybrid of "big-idea" advertising thinking and high-end design expertise. His mission at Lucky Generals is to move design away from being an "add-on" or "final polish" and instead treat it as a core creative capability that shapes a brand's behaviour from the very start.
Nathan is building a model where design sits at the heart of strategy, providing a faster, more fluid route into cultural moments. He views his team not as decorators, but as practitioners and cultural translators who use design thinking to make brands more culturally fluent. Whether he is collaborating with fan groups to design a tifo in tribute to Diogo Jota at his beloved Wolves, or challenging outdated ways of viewing a head of design, Nathan is a champion for proactive experimentation. He is a firm believer that designers shouldn't just wait for briefs to land, but should make their own to test, fail, and learn.
He sits down with LBB’s Alex Reeves to discuss his journey from the renegade DIY culture of skateboarding to leading design at Lucky Generals, and why the agency of the future must treat design as a creative force in its own right.
LBB> You were at Saatchi & Saatchi for ages and were part of the Publicis Groupe for a long time, so you know what it’s like to be in a big holding company. Now you’re in a place that is more boutique, within the gigantic Omnicom.
Nathan> Totally. They are fiercely protective of that, but they still have the protection and foundation of the group. It is probably one of the most ideal situations to be in because you have that independent spirit but the security of everything else. I think a lot of creatives and designers are seeking that independence again.
LBB> A lot of ad agencies lately have been saying they are making design more of a central part of their offering. You seem to be part of a wave.
Nathan> Some of those articles you read do feel quite performative, like it's the new shiny toy everyone gets to talk about. I’m all for it because it puts design back in the centre of the conversation, which brings more investment and interest. If one agency or designer does it well, we all benefit. I’m really keen on making sure the design community is felt and heard.
Designers haven't really asked for the performative aspect. We’ve always been doing the same thing – finding ways to make design work in an agency. I feel like what is happening now, I was doing five or six years ago. We set up a 'Concept Design Department' in Saatchi very early on. It was a proof of concept that just worked and was one of the most awarded times in Saatchi, but the problem was it wasn't particularly profitable because you’re working on all the 'cool' stuff and award-chasing.
But it showed how experimental design could be and the collaborative influence it has with creatives. To my mind, it’s a no-brainer. Over time, design gets mistaken for production and watered down. So, this resurgence is a rediscovery of the value and importance of consistency across brands. Advertising agencies might have two or three big conversations with a client a year about a launch, but brands now have those business problems daily. Design is the thing that makes everything consistent; you need that rhythm and speed.
LBB> I wanted to look at this moment through the distillation of your career. You trained as a designer – was that always the plan?
Nathan> I don’t know if I always wanted to be a designer, it was just something I was naturally interested in. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately – why am I where I am? I never really had a career plan. I just enjoy the process and making things.
Honestly, it came back from skateboarding. It was almost destined to go that way. You are always so appreciative of art and artists and the DIY culture of it. You have to solve problems yourself and be a bit of a renegade. I was always wanting to do that in every aspect. I wasn't good enough to go pro, so the next best thing was to be in a design culture where you bring those qualities into a career where you can create and be inspired. I never want this to feel like a 'job'. As soon as an agency feels like a job where I have to go in and do tasks, it’s game over. I want there to be something new every day.
LBB> You started in agencies doing a design role, and eventually you got into Saatchi.
Nathan> It was an element of luck. Being in advertising wasn't the agenda. I did a Jack-of-all-trades multimedia degree at university which gave me exposure to lots of different things. I always excelled in the design tasks and pretty much failed in everything else.
Then it was the era of web design and those Facebook web applications; Web 2.0 was booming. Everyone was looking to do web design and coding. I had a friend who was really good at coding, and we did an internship together where I was the designer and he was the coder. We were able to do loads of really cool experimental stuff.
Then I was looking to progress – where can I do this at a more advanced stage? Saatchi had just acquired an experiential agency called Outside Line, and they were doing lots of web application stuff. They were hiring web designers, so I came in as a digital designer for them. Very quickly, everyone got really bored of Web 2.0. You’re in the industry and you’re looking over at the art directors and creatives and thinking, 'I want to get touched by the idea'. I made it my ambition to find out what they were doing and learn from within.
LBB> Has it always been your impulse to not be at the production end of just 'doing the thing' at the end, but getting involved in the idea earlier?
Nathan> Absolutely. You sort of need to do both as a designer because there is a craft element in the production, but I was so tired of making bad art directors look good – enhancing their idea and then they take all the plaudits for it.
I can create these ideas and execute them myself. I was taught very early on by Brazilian and South American designers who are so multidisciplinary; an art director there has ideas and the ability to create them themselves – they are one-man machines. That is how I’ve always learned to work. I don’t need an art director to show me their bad Pinterest board and tell me to 'turn this into something'.
LBB> What have been the key projects in your career that felt like a leap forward?
Nathan> When I was partnered with a copywriter at Saatchi, Will Brookwell, it was the summation of everything. We created a really powerful team where we could just do everything ourselves. We created compelling ideas and took them through to such a refined level that they were instantly sellable.
That was the stuff on Hope United. It was a small Euros tactical brief on how to get BT into the game as a sponsor. No real strong strategy points, but me and Will really like sports and we came up with this idea of a team against hate using the Home Nations players. It turned into giant campaigns, it ended up in FIFA, and we created shirts out of it. Because the concept was so compelling and we were so sure of what it was, it was easy to access loads of different points. When you get the team and the balance right, it can really work.
LBB> That's a sweet gig for someone into football and branding. You’re a Wolves fan, right?
Nathan> The things I do with Wolves were always just an outlet for me to create, to test ideas, and to see how far I could read fan sentiment. I remained anonymous so I could remove any ego or expectation. Out of that came amazing opportunities like working with Wolverhampton rappers, some of the players wearing the merch, and being invited into the Old Gold Pack to do some flags, which led to the Jota tifo.
It all came from just wanting to create something. There’s no mandate or brief; you're doing it to tap into the culture and help build it. You have to be legitimately part of it for it to work. In football, it moves and changes every week. You can’t labour over something for a week because the moment's gone. You’ve got to be reactive. That combines what I do in my career – thinking fast and being agile.
LBB> What was the allure of Lucky Generals? You were at Saatchi for a long time.
Nathan> I’ve got a lot of heart for Saatchi and I was treated well there. I could have stayed there for many more years, but the thing that drew me to Luckys was that independence and the spirit they have here. The founders are such champions and backers of talent. It feels like they are giving people the space to do what they want and build what they think is right. That’s really compelling for me because it pushes you further out of your comfort zone. At Saatchi, sometimes things are very structured and can feel like a gift, but here the opportunity is there – you just need to go and find it.
LBB> How are you working to build that design-centricity within the agency?
Nathan> It’s a process. Just hiring an EDD isn't enough; it takes a whole agency to shift and understand what it can offer. It's about making sure design is part of the strategy and can be the solution at the start sometimes, or the solution at the end. It’s an education piece at the moment – showing more and more what design can bring to the table and being part of the conversations early on rather than just being production.
There’s loads of discipline in it. There are moments to change the logo or the font, but it's more about: what areas can't you reach with advertising? How do we create consistency in how it looks, sounds, and moves? Design can be the architect of all of that and unlock new work streams.
LBB> How do you build space for experimentation with very corporate clients?
Nathan> It’s a real balance. My role is to create that space and the design loops we need. It’s about building it into the process and the time. Some things are still a 'just get it done' attitude, but if we really want to be original and fresh, that's the only way you're going to do it. You can't ask people to do that – it needs to be in their DNA, whether that’s finding a new program or how they bring AI into their work streams. You have to have that self-drive to want to experiment.
Joining things midway through is always tricky. How can you incrementally change it or make it better without breaking everything down and inserting yourself as an ego? There are some brave brands here that really do want to change something and recognise the need for it. It's about not just giving them what they're asking for, but highlighting where the issues are and how design can help with different problems – like how the brand is being stifled by its guidelines.
LBB> Is there anything else you want to get across?
Nathan> Not really. Talk is cheap; we’re here to do stuff. As great as these articles are around design and giving design a platform, it is about the doing. Until we have proof of concept, I’m happy to just work on the trajectory we're on. I think ad agencies haven't really woken up to putting design so centrally. We’ve always been here and always been presenting that sort of work, but the agency hasn't prioritised it or been brave enough to get there.
Why don't I just go to a design agency? Because here in advertising, you really get to the heart of business problems. It’s not just a veneer. We understand the brand just as well as a design studio because we understand their problems and try to attack them in creative ways. Design agencies are now saying to clients, 'We can do your rebrand, but we can also look at how it turns into a campaign', and ad agencies are doing it back. We’re all chasing the same piece of work but offering different capabilities.
